[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh
From: |
Noah Misch |
Subject: |
Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Aug 2007 21:51:08 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.9i |
On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 08:33:21PM -0400, David Bruce wrote:
> I've inherited an autotools-using project and am trying to learn more about
> autoconf and automake. The project has used the following brief autogen.sh:
>
> aclocal && autoheader && autoconf && automake --add-missing --copy
>
> Is there any reason I can't just use autoreconf, which I understand is
> supposed to fill this role?
Autoreconf will indeed replace this simple autogen.sh.
- autoreconf vs autogen.sh, David Bruce, 2007/08/24
- Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh, Benoit SIGOURE, 2007/08/25
- Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh, Roman Rybalko, 2007/08/27
- Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh, Ralf Wildenhues, 2007/08/27
- Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh, Benoit SIGOURE, 2007/08/27
- Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh, Roman Rybalko, 2007/08/27
- Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh, Ralf Wildenhues, 2007/08/27
- Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh, Roman Rybalko, 2007/08/27
- Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh, Noah Misch, 2007/08/27
- Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh, Andreas Schwab, 2007/08/27
Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh,
Noah Misch <=
Re: autoreconf vs autogen.sh, Ralf Wildenhues, 2007/08/25